Amnesty International today
called on the Mexican authorities to free Alberto Patishtán, a Tzotzil
Indigenous man and bilingual teacher from the state of Chiapas, in order to end
13 years of unjust imprisonment. His prolonged detention shows once again that
in Mexico Indigenous or poor people continue to suffer the denial of their human
rights, such as the right to live free from discrimination and the right to a
fair trial.

After studying the case of
Alberto Patishtán, who was convicted of the murder of seven policemen, the
organization believes his prosecution and conviction to be unfair. The recent
decision by the Federal Collegiate Court of Tuxtla Gutiérrez to reject a legal
petition to recognise his innocence means that he has no other effective remedy
available to him in Mexico’s justice system to correct the injustice that he is
living.

Amnesty International
recognises the gravity of the multiple killings committed on 12 June 2000 during
an ambush in the municipality of Simojovel, Chiapas state. Relatives and
survivors have the right to demand those truly responsible are brought to
justice. However, Amnesty International’s study of the case indicates that
Alberto Patishtán did not participate in the crime and there are serious flaws
in the investigation and judicial process he was subjected to. Those truly
responsible for the killings continue to enjoy impunity.

As with other cases
documented by Amnesty International, the fact that Alberto Patishtán is
Indigenous and lacks economic resources played a fundamental role in limiting
his right to a fair trial, in particular his right to effective defence and
equal treatment before the law by the public prosecutor and the
judiciary.

In 2002, the First District
Federal Court In Chiapas sentenced Alberto Patishtán to 60 years in prison for
crimes of wounding, aggravated homicide, aggravated robbery, damages and illegal
possession of arms exclusively for the use of the Army. An appeal, a judicial
review and first petition for recognition of innocence were rejected in 2002,
2003 and 2009 respectively. However, Amnesty International believes that the
irregularities in the investigation and judicial process were never properly
assessed in order to correct his conviction.

The second petition for
recognition of innocence, presented in 2013, sought to demonstrate that
according to 2011 constitutional human rights reforms and the judiciary’s own
jurisprudence developed since 2000, the evaluation of prosecution and defence
evidence should have protected fundamental rights, such as the presumption of
innocence and due process to ensure a fair trial.

The Federal Collegiate Court
in Tuxtla Gutiérrez rejected this petition on the grounds that the recent
advances in jurisprudence did not constitute “new evidence”. At the same time,
the court recognised that its decision “was not a pronouncement on the criminal
responsibility of the petitioner”. However, the court failed to take advantage
of the opportunity to review the sentence in the light of the new standards to
protect human rights. It is worrying that the judiciary has avoided analysing
the sentence taking into account international human rights norms that now form
part of the Mexican constitution.

On reviewing the case in
detail, Amnesty International believes there are serious flaws in the
investigation, prosecution and sentence.

In particular, the
organization believes:

There was never an
investigation into the undue influence over the public prosecutor’s
investigation exerted by the municipal president of El Bosque, a neighbouring
municipality to Simojovel and where Alberto Patishtán lived. His son was one of
only two survivors of the attack and the only witness to identify Alberto
Patishtán. Before his son made his statement identifying Patishtán, the
municipal president told the prosecutor that he was one of perpetrators. He also
provided the supposed motive. These elements served to issue a warrant to locate
Patishtán. He also provided a photo of Patishtán which the prosecutor used to
press the case and encourage witnesses to implicate the Indigenous
teacher.

There was never an impartial
investigation into the social context which could have motivated a false
accusation by the municipal president and his son against Alberto Patishtán. A
month before the killings, Alberto Patishtán and other people from the community
had publicly requested the removal of the municipal president. This information
was never investigated by the prosecutor or considered seriously by the trial or
appeal court judges.

There are unresolved
contradictions between the different statements given by the municipal
president’s son on the events of the crime.

There are unresolved
contradictions between the statements of the municipal president’s son and the
other survivor of the attack, including the manner in which it took place and
the clothes of the attackers, such as whether they were wearing balaclavas or
not.

In one of the son’s
statements, he implicated a second person who was later acquitted after
demonstrating his innocence, once again placing in doubt his credibility as a
witness.

Alberto Patishtán did not
have access to effective legal counsel to ensure he could defend himself against
the charges, cross examine witnesses and other evidence, or present effective
defence evidence.

The judicial decision to
dismiss evidence provided by various defence witnesses which showed Alberto
Patishtán was in another place at the time of the crime is in contrast to the
manner in which contradictions in the prosecution witnesses’ statements were
ignored.

There were violations in due
process by the prosecutor when collecting evidence and presuming the guilt of
Alberto Patishtán. Similarly, the judiciary, failed to guarantee the right to
presumption of innocence by ignoring these violations in due process and their
impact on the evaluation of the evidence.

Amnesty International
believes that these irregularities show that the sentence against Alberto
Patishtán was issued without guaranteeing his fundamental rights and have
resulted in his unfair and prolonged incarceration. He and his family have had
to live with this injustice for 13 years. Also, the health of the indigenous
teacher has deteriorated during his time in prison.

Now, the only judicial means
available to him is a long route through the Inter American Human Rights System,
which may take several years to guarantee access to an effective legal remedy.
Therefore, Amnesty International believes that the federal authorities must end
this injustice and free Alberto Patishtán immediately to reaffirm the rule of
Law and human rights.

Additional
Information:

Amnesty International has
collected more than 27,000 signatures during the past few weeks demanding
justice for Alberto Patishtán.